Obtaining a copy of an unusual photo

B

Bluenose

Suspended / Banned
Messages
660
Name
Geoff
Edit My Images
Yes
I wonder if anyone might be able to help me please.

My wife has a school photograph that was taken in 1963. It is a picture of all of the girls and the picture measures approximately 3feet 6inches long by 8inches wide and so it is quite large.

I would have thought that this would be a job for some sort of specialist processor and I just don't know where to start looking.

Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
 
You say your wife has an image?? Just copy that easy enough

I don't understand what you are looking for - If you need an edit or copy doing anyone with photoshop could do that for you ( I have Photoshop if that is what you need and would be happy to assist)

Les:)
 
Bluenose said:
I wonder if anyone might be able to help me please.

My wife has a school photograph that was taken in 1963. It is a picture of all of the girls and the picture measures approximately 3feet 6inches long by 8inches wide and so it is quite large.

I would have thought that this would be a job for some sort of specialist processor and I just don't know where to start looking.

Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Click to expand...
'Large format scanning' is probably a good search term. Random example:
www.scansolutions.co.uk

Drawing Scanning Service - Scanning and Data Solutions Limited

Our drawing scanning service is a secure cost effective way of getting rid of the piles of files you have in your organisation. Providing an indexed solution for fast location and access
www.scansolutions.co.uk www.scansolutions.co.uk
 
Lez325 said:
You say your wife has an image?? Just copy that easy enough

I don't understand what you are looking for - If you need an edit or copy doing anyone with photoshop could do that for you ( I have Photoshop if that is what you need and would be happy to assist)

Les:)
Click to expand...
It'll be a large print Les not a digital image :)
 
A competent photographer with a (digital) camera of decent resolution could photograph the print and print (or have printed) a copy at the same size or smaller. If you knew someone like that, it needn't cost too much ...

Note the word competent ...
 
Is the name of the Photographer on the picture or in the school records. Perhaps you could contact the Photographer and order a new copy.

Dave
 
DemiLion said:
Does anyone seem to understand the term: Copyright?
Click to expand...

Dave Canon said:
Is the name of the Photographer on the picture or in the school records. Perhaps you could contact the Photographer and order a new copy.

Dave
Click to expand...

What about, bearing in mind it was 58 years ago, if the photographer is now out of business and high likelihood that the school has not kept copies or records (for a number of reasons???) that the copyright holder cannot be traced.

What options does the OP have to ensure he has done due diligence before approaching a specialist scanning company for what sounds like a copy for personal use only?
 
Bluenose said:
Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Click to expand...
I see you're listed as being in Exmouth. Have you tried Photo Services, next to the roundabout at the end of the Parade?
 
DemiLion said:
Does anyone seem to understand the term: Copyright?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that for a photograph taken at that date, copyright would belong to the commissioning body, ie the school. And for such a date & circumstance, copyright would accord with the law at the time, & last 50y after the image was made. 1963 + 50y = 2013. It's now 2021. Am I missing something?
 
Last edited:
droj said:
And for such a date & circumstance, copyright would accord with the law at the time, & last 50y after the image was made. 1963 + 50y = 2013. It's now 2021. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
I believe the copyright extension applied to all works that were still under copyright at the time of implementation... i.e. it expires in 2033
 
droj said:
My understanding is that for a photograph taken at that date, copyright would belong to the commissioning body, ie the school. And for such a date & circumstance, copyright would accord with the law at the time, & last 50y after the image was made. 1963 + 50y = 2013. It's now 2021. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
Plus 70 years not 50. Of course we do not know what was in any contract between the photographer and the School. Also some local Photography businesses continue for a long period even being passed on to sons or daughters. Of course no certainly that they could locate a film that far back but who know without asking.

Dave
 
I have often wondered if you photograph a photograph, does the new image become your image, or is it simply copyright infringement?
 
sk66 said:
It is an *infringing copy; and it doesn't only apply to photographing other photos.


(*there are exceptions)
Click to expand...
I have seen people holding a photo up in front of them, while they had their photo taken. Maybe something like that, would not be seen as copyright infringement.
 
The reason for wanting a copy is because my wife met up with one of her old school friends last week and she no longer has her copy. It has been about 55 years since they last met plus, it is a strong possibility that the original photographer is now in the great darkroom in the sky!

There doesn't seem to be any clear indication of any 'joins' in the photograph and so I am wondering what sort of lens would have been used as there no sign of any distortion at both extremes which are 42inches apart.

The original school was known as the Harrison Barrow Grammar School and no longer exists in that form.

Thank you Andrew Flannigan, I could give Photo Services a call,

Not sure if this will cause an additional problem but the photo has been rolled up for most of the 50 odd years!
 
Bluenose said:
There doesn't seem to be any clear indication of any 'joins' in the photograph and so I am wondering what sort of lens would have been used as there no sign of any distortion at both extremes which are 42inches apart.
Click to expand...
Possibly something like this - http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Widelux

At my school there was always one lad who would stand at one end of the rows at the start of the camera's spin and run round to the other end for its finish - thereby appearing twice on the same picture!
 
jonbeeza said:
I have seen people holding a photo up in front of them, while they had their photo taken. Maybe something like that, would not be seen as copyright infringement.
Click to expand...
Incidental inclusion is one exception; e.g. if it happens to be on the wall behind the person being photographed and it is partly included... holding it up in front of the person is not the same thing.
Basically, the more dependent your picture is on the inclusion of the other work, the more likely it is to be an infringing copy.
 
Peter123 said:
I doubt if a school photo from a school that no longer exists that is being copied only once to give to a friend is going to incur the wrath of anyone outside this forum.
Click to expand...
Indeed, copy and be damned to adapt a famous phrase, let the author sue!
 
Dave Canon said:
Plus 70 years not 50.
Click to expand...
Well it would be now, but the original is pre 1988 so my understanding was that the previous period of 50y pertains ... but see below ...
 
Last edited:
They used to use a novel camera which wound the film along as it took the photo in one go, revolving slowly on the tripod. In theory you could dart from one end to the other and be in it twice.
Used occasionally for larger schools we had one done at secondary school in whitby.
 
sk66 said:
I believe the copyright extension applied to all works that were still under copyright at the time of implementation... i.e. it expires in 2033
Click to expand...
Something to look into ... yes you could be right, Steven - the wording I've seen could be held to be ambiguous ...
 
Last edited:
Peter123 said:
I doubt if a school photo from a school that no longer exists that is being copied only once to give to a friend is going to incur the wrath of anyone outside this forum.
Click to expand...
But a reputable repro shop is likely to decline the work unless documentation can be provided. Even if the company ceases to exist, it's assets (copyrights) do not... if the copyrights still exist (w/in timeframe) then someone still owns them. It is not until expiration that the work enters the public domain.

However, there is a process for obtaining rights to use an orphaned work... it is probably most applicable here and only costs £20
 
Last edited:
Ed Sutton said:
Possibly something like this - http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Widelux

At my school there was always one lad who would stand at one end of the rows at the start of the camera's spin and run round to the other end for its finish - thereby appearing twice on the same picture!
Click to expand...

I was thinking along those lines as well.
 
Either a 'Widelux' (as above) or a Large Format negative cropped accordingly (which is what most school photographers do now).
 
Peter123 said:
I doubt if a school photo from a school that no longer exists that is being copied only once to give to a friend is going to incur the wrath of anyone outside this forum.
Click to expand...
Remember that you'll need a model release form from everyone in the photo.

;)
 
gramps said:
It'll be a large print Les not a digital image :)
Click to expand...
Yes I did think that- but the image could be photographed on a digital camera, was my thinking Roger :)
Pound Coin said:
Remember that you'll need a model release form from everyone in the photo.

;)
Click to expand...
Agreed- But only for commercial work as I understand it- I may be wrong ?

What Is a Model Release Form?

A model release form offers written permission for the photographer to use images taken during a photoshoot, for commercial purposes. If the model is under 18 years of age then the form must be signed by a parent or legal guardian.

Les :)
 
Lez325 said:
Yes I did think that- but the image could be photographed on a digital camera, was my thinking Roger :)

Agreed- But only for commercial work as I understand it- I may be wrong ?

What Is a Model Release Form?

A model release form offers written permission for the photographer to use images taken during a photoshoot, for commercial purposes. If the model is under 18 years of age then the form must be signed by a parent or legal guardian.

Les :)
Click to expand...
It gets worse!!!!
 
Lez325 said:
Agreed- But only for commercial work as I understand it- I may be wrong ?

What Is a Model Release Form?

A model release form offers written permission for the photographer to use images taken during a photoshoot, for commercial purposes. If the model is under 18 years of age then the form must be signed by a parent or legal guardian.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the comment was meant as a joke...
EU/UK law does not have commercial appropriation rights (right of likeness/image) and does not generally require a model release (rights waiver); that's primarily a U.S. thing.
 
At that time the prints were made as contact prints so the negative was the same size as the print.
The contract printer was very basic it was a long wooden box with a few sheets of glass in layers below the negative and opal glasses over the light source.
any shading was done by laying pieces of tissue on the glass layers. You could not burn in only dodge. this was done to even up the exposure as one side of the circle of people was almost always lighter than the other. i was actually quite easy to do ( I printed some in the 50's) contact printing was still quite common in those days, and rolls of Velox paper paper was easy to get. right down to 127 and 120 sizes. it was also available as cut sheets for amateur use.

To day the easiest way to make a copy is by shooting a number of sections and stitching them. You then have a digital file to use as you like.
 
We would have used a commercial drum scanner back in the day to scan large artworks. But i don't know it they still exist or whether it would be cost effective. It may also be overkill, as I bet the original won't be that sharp to begin with.

You could scan it on a home printer and stitch it together in either Photoshop or Lightroom with a lot of success.

My mum has a similar picture from her high school and said they all had to stand very still for a considerable time as the camera did its work.

She also mentioned the whole idea of being able to sneak off one end and run round to the other to be in it twice, but though lots of people say "I know someone that did it" it was always an apocryphal tale of 'someone' in another school that did it.

I'd love to see proof.

ETA:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blB6gYG9lpM&t=4s
 
Last edited:
Kell said:
She also mentioned the whole idea of being able to sneak off one end and run round to the other to be in it twice, but though lots of people say "I know someone that did it" it was always an apocryphal tale of 'someone' in another school that did it.
Click to expand...
It’s likely the photographer removed them thinking it would reduce sales :(.
 
Kell said:
She also mentioned the whole idea of being able to sneak off one end and run round to the other to be in it twice, but though lots of people say "I know someone that did it" it was always an apocryphal tale of 'someone' in another school that did it.

I'd love to see proof.
Click to expand...
No myth. I'll see if I can find one. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top